S.B. v. K.C.
688 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Oct 18, 2016Background
- Mother, S.B., previously held custody but Grandmother obtained primary custody; multiple past custody orders and relocations were litigated over years.
- Maternal Grandmother filed a Petition to Confirm Relocation to Sarasota, Florida, which would alter custody and relocate the child.
- A December 11, 2015 judicial conference granted relocation on pleadings; Mother did not appear and a December 14, 2015 vacatur and relisting occurred to give Mother another chance.
- A second hearing on December 21, 2015 again saw Mother fail to appear, with counsel present and a bench warrant issued for Mother.
- January 29, 2016 final order granted relocation to Sarasota, suspended Mother’s custodial rights; Mother timely appealed on March 4, 2016; Superior Court affirmed the trial court’s decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Personal jurisdiction and service of relocation notice | Mother contends lack of proper service and fraud in service. | Grandmother provided proper notice and service; relocation supported by record. | No reversible error; service adequate; relocation proper. |
| Whether relocation was properly supported by 28 Pa.C.S. § 5337 factors | Mother argues the court did not address 5337 factors with competent proof. | Court relied on full record and statutory framework; relocation on pleadings appropriate. | Relocation affirmed; record supports outcome. |
| Whether issuing a bench warrant and lack of notice violated due process | Mother challenges arrest warrant and alleged lack of notice and service. | Court provided opportunities to appear; issues were not preserved on appeal. | Waiveded; issues not preserved; affirmed on other grounds. |
| Timeliness and perfection of the appeal under Rule 1925 | Rule 1925(b) statement not filed timely as required. | Some compliance occurred; overall noncompliance warranted dismissal. | Waived; appeal not properly perfected. |
Key Cases Cited
- E.R. v. J.N.B., 129 A.3d 521 (Pa. Super. 2015) (standard of review for custody orders; abuse of discretion)
- In re K.T.E.L., 983 A.2d 745 (Pa. Super. 2009) (contemporary Rule 1925(b) concerns in fast track appeals)
- Dowling, 788 A.2d 683 (Pa. Super. 2001) (waiver when 1925(b) statement is too vague to address issues)
- Stout v. Universal Underwriters Ins. Co., 421 A.2d 1047 (Pa. 1980) (dismissal of defective notices of appeal handled sparingly)
- Krebs v. United Refining Company of Pennsylvania, 893 A.2d 776 (Pa. Super. 2006) (preserves issues by raising them in concise form)